These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 135736)
21. A theory of hospital financial analysis. Elnicki RA Health Serv Res; 1969; 4(1):14-41. PubMed ID: 5799485 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Reimbursement system must recognize real costs-part 2. Hitt DH Hospitals; 1977 Jan; 51(2):69-70, 72, 75-7. PubMed ID: 832848 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Lessons from the New Jersey experience: from the top down. Goldstein JR Health Care Strateg Manage; 1983 Oct; 1(1):18-9. PubMed ID: 10310341 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. [Productivity-based payment. A new system in Germany combines efficiency and cost control]. Horgby PJ Lakartidningen; 1997 Feb; 94(8):646, 649, 651-2. PubMed ID: 9072656 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. A comparative study: health care delivery in New Jersey county, state, Federal, and private mental hospitals. Memmola LK J Leg Med (N Y); 1974; 2(6):31-40. PubMed ID: 4215858 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. Relate hospital charges to use of services. Wood CT Harv Bus Rev; 1982; 60(2):123-30. PubMed ID: 10309553 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. AMA 1983 annual meeting report. Diagnostic related groups (DRG) and cost shift to private insurers. J Tenn Med Assoc; 1983 Nov; 76(11):717-20. PubMed ID: 6418974 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Hospital costs and controls in Canada and the United States. Hill LA Health Serv Res; 1969; 4(3):170-6. PubMed ID: 5349001 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Measuring severity of illness to predict patient resource use within DRGs. Horn SD; Sharkey PD Inquiry; 1983; 20(4):314-21. PubMed ID: 6229481 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. [Ambulatory charges in psychiatry: description and comments]. Dufour H; Roland JM Rev Med Suisse Romande; 1993 Oct; 113(10):835-8. PubMed ID: 8256069 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Selected results from an evaluation of the New Jersey Diagnosis-Related Group System. May JJ; Wasserman J Health Serv Res; 1984 Dec; 19(5):547-59. PubMed ID: 6438023 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Some savings seen, but jury still out on Jersey DRG plan. McLeod D Bus Insur; 1983 Feb; 17(7):3, 32. PubMed ID: 10325062 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Financial management and third party reimbursement. Problems in receivables. Happach B Top Health Care Financ; 1976; 3(1):11-20. PubMed ID: 973214 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Incentive reimbursement: California: lesson in belt-tightening. Mod Hosp; 1972 Oct; 119(4):85-6. PubMed ID: 5074514 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Prospective payment gets mixed reviews in N.J. Lefton D Am Med News; 1982 Nov; 25(43):1, 11-2. PubMed ID: 10309788 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Government Research Corporation provides model prospective reimbursement program. Employee Benefit Plan Rev; 1977 Sep; 32(3):20-1. PubMed ID: 10304841 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. All New Jersey hospitals switch to diagnosis-related reimbursements. Med World News; 1982 Feb; 23(3):30, 37-8. PubMed ID: 10309535 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Reimbursement under DRGs: implementation in New Jersey. Davies RH; Westfall G Health Serv Res; 1983; 18(2 Pt 1):233-47. PubMed ID: 6409841 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]